Article in profile issues in Teachers Professional Development · June 017 doi: 10. 15446/profile v19n1. 55957 citations 35 reads 846 authors: Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects

constructivism (Ausubel, 1983; Vygotsky, 1978), and 
the language learning pedagogy (Whong, 2011). On the 
other hand, the technological basis is integrated by the 
vles and the call (Thomas, Reinders, & Warschauer, 
2013a).
The transactional distance theory emerges from 
distance education, in which “distance” exists not 
only geographically, but also in the interactions 
between the teacher and the learner, the environment 
and the behaviors. According to Moore (1993), this 
“separation” affects both teaching and learning as there 
is a psychological and communicational gap, which 
could easily lead to confusion. It is this psychological 
separation that is referred to as transactional distance, 
and it demands specific teaching and learning strategies 
(instructional dialogue, structure, and autonomy) to 
be reduced.
Constructivism is known as a psychological and 
philosophical view, which assumes that what a person 
learns is the result of the constructions of knowledge 
based on his/her experiences and through interaction 
(Schunk, 2012). Constructivism has, among other things, 
been the foundation of the learner-centered approach; 
therefore, the teacher’s and learner’s roles have adopted 
different, specific characteristics. The teacher is expected 
to generate the conditions for the learners to interact 
with contents in an active way, as well as to generate 
the opportunities for them to socialize knowledge. 
Therefore, the learner is expected to take an active role, 
self-regulating and collaborating with others to approach 
contents from different perspectives.
This view of social learning is well recognized in 
the work of Vygotsky (1978), from whose perspective 
is the social component that transforms the personal 
experiences of the learner and leads to a reorganization 
of mental structures. This is often referred to as dialectic 
or cognitive constructivism (Schunk, 2012). Here, the 
cognitive function suggests that learners are able to 
monitor and evaluate a stimulus and develop a response; 
however, learners are not passive entities as they are 
able to control the learning process.
In the context of language learning, when learners 
are trying to learn a new element of the target language, 
they often compare it to the repertoire they have already 
learned, then make a hypothetical plan and try it. If such 
hypothesis is correct, they accept or reject it and try a 
new one. In this trial and error exercise, grammatical 
rules are learned individually, but when learners take 
this knowledge to a social environment of exchange, 
internalization of knowledge takes place and conducts 
to a reorganization of thoughts (Shastri, 2010).
The conceptions sustained by Ausubel (1983) may be 
helpful to understand the “meaningfulness” of learning 
experiences. In his view, meaningful learning is an 
extension of the knowledge that the learner already 
has. This basis, previous to knowledge or the cognitive 
structure, serves as an anchor for new information; that 
is, linking new information to existing information 
leads to meaningful learning. However, it is important 
to understand that meaningful learning cannot only 
happen by association; there should be an interactive 
process. Thus, this interaction between previous and 
new knowledge is what modifies the existing cognitive 
structure and makes learning meaningful.

---

Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias Humanas, Departamento de Lenguas Extranjeras
78
Herrera Díaz & González Miy
Figure 1 shows how the pedagogical and tech-
nological sides are interconnected by the coi, all aiming 
at the development of the oral skill.
Language learning pedagogy, specifically the 
communicative approach, seems like a feasible way to 
reach the goals for verbal and written communication, 
since its focus is on language use instead of on learning 
language and grammatical rules (Whong, 2011). Thus, 
learners are encouraged to speak as much as possible 
in order to communicate, emphasizing the process 
rather than the final product. Mistakes are treated 
secondarily with the teacher being careful not to cause 
the learners distractions while communicating and 
interacting. Furthermore, by using authentic materials 
or those specifically created for language learners (often 
found in efl textbooks), learning is promoted in an 
environment where linguistic situations are created 
to simulate reality. In this sense, the communicative 
approach promotes an active learning process through 
interaction between the users.
Regarding the technological foundation, the 
vles consist of the hardware for the installation of 
learning resources, which are placed on the cyberspace 
and accessed through the internet (Leakey, 2011). 
They are also referred to as management learning 
environments (mle) or course management systems 
(cms), which offer learning and evaluation materials 
as well as communication means to be used among 
learners and instructors. These environments facilitate 
the administration of educational materials and 
their delivery to their users; such materials include 
multimedia resources that accelerate learning and foster 
learners’ autonomy. Additionally, their availability, 
automatic revision, communication tools, and 
information storage, represent advantages for both 
the learners and instructors, making them functional 
for distance learning (Leakey, 2011).
This technological scenario encompasses the call 
approach, which serves as a methodology that, according 
to Thomas et al. (2013b), aims to use digital equipment 
in the teaching-learning field. In words of Leakey (2011), 
call is better understood as
the exploration, sometimes coherent, sometimes disparate, of all 
aspects of the human-computer axis, with the primary goal of